Tom Burton explains how AI fact-checking could work like traditional newsrooms, with automated agents acting as editors to catch hallucinations and errors. Automation raises the odds of accurate outputs but can't promise perfection.
Traditionally. Right. Think of the, you know, even journalism and things like that. Right. Traditionally, somebody would write it. You have an editor, you have different, you know, people along the way, checks and balances, all of that stuff before something ends up in a production release. Right. It's just the same thing. But how do you automate that? And you could potentially have. Yeah, you could have all kinds of different fact checking agents and all of those things. Is there still guarantee of perfection? No. But is the chance or the probability of something being actually valuable, as well as eliminating hallucinations and inaccuracies is much higher? Yes. Right.
What does AI actually mean for a wholesale distributor #WholesaleDistribution
If your systems don’t talk to each other, your AI won’t either #AITransformation
This is why one AI agent isn’t enough for high-stakes decisions #WholesaleDistribution
